The Alaska schools would be a stretch. I don't think the WAC is in a position to add the travel costs to each of its members, at this point.

The WAC needs to ensure that its members make $$$. And you don't make more money by increasing costs. So, find schools that fit 'geographically', are in major markets, and provide easy travel options.

Major markets with travel options:The markets that would help the WAC: Denver, Colorado Springs, Oklahoma City, St. Louis, Portland, Dallas, any major city in California. Unfortunately, there aren't too many major markets with Universities...in northern Arizona, southern Utah, northern New Mexico, west Texas, west Kansas. So, there is a large void in the footprint of the WAC. Which makes it all that more important to grab the major markets.

Schools within those markets:-Colorado: Metro State, Regis, UC Colorado Springs, School of Mines(fb), CSU Pueblo(fb). Any of these schools would really help cut down on travel with a two division system. -St. Louis: St. Louis could help make Chicago State and UM KC happier by cutting their travel. And if both are happy...they are less likely to leave. UM St. Louis or Lindenwood(fb)-Dallas: UD, UTD, Dallas Baptist...could help create an eastern division with Chicago, KC, St Louis, UTRGV, and whoever else(NMSU, Metro State, etc.) None of these schools have pushed hard for DI, so, without some motivation...this group could be tough to convince.-Oklahoma: C. Ok(fb), OKCU, ....? C Ok, is a solid choice for fb. OKCU, isn't all that big.-Portland: Portland State plays fb...and might compete better at a lower level, which the WAC would be with some DII call ups.

I feel there are enough decent options that are within the current footprint...even without listing any California schools. With just two schools in the Colorado area...the conferences travel budget would be cut by a good percentage. Especially, if visiting schools schedule double headers with the two Colorado schools and ...the two schools travel together for away games.

If the schools are saving money on travel...then that leaves more money in their pockets.

So, there are plenty of major markets within the WAC's footprint...they just need to focus on a few of them...and get 'er done. Reduce travel, create divisions, and get some regionality built into the conference.If the schools are making more money and traveling less....the situation gets better very quickly.

Nobody is fond of adding a bunch of DII schools, but realistically...there aren't many other options to solidify this conference.

Alaska Anchorage presents the same problem the WAC had with Montana - the #2 school in the state wasn't as ready to move to the next level. In this case Alaska (Fairbanks) is even farther behind, as the Nanooks only field 10 teams.

I think if Metro State wants to join the WAC, all it has to do is apply for Division I and pay the fee. The scheduling rules regarding transitional schools won't be an issue if the WAC only brings in one more school before 2017. Metro State plays baseball, softball, and both men's and women's soccer, which helps with satisfying AQ requirements.

Dixie State in Utah, if it shutters or finds a home for its football program, would also be a good catch. It might be easier to get Idaho to rejoin and get the Big Sky to take Dixie State.

Western Washington would also be a logical target as te school dropped football six years ago, and is 90 minutes from Seattle.

WAC FLIGHT RISKSUCSB - is waiting on the Big West invite.UMKC and Chicago St - are waiting on anyone in the Midwest to invite them except the Summit (and they might rethink that if they decide the travel is too much in the WAC)UTRGV - is waiting on a Southland inviteNMSU - is waiting on a Sun Belt full invite (or Southland non fb in invite)Seattle - is waiting on a WCC invite

If one or two members leaves they are in big trouble. The WAC knows they are a conference of last resort and the only DI school left to fill in is NJIT. I'm sure they tried to pursue other DII upgrades but only GCU said yes.

The Alaska schools (if they wanted to upgrade) would be an excellent pickup for the WAC. They guarantee long term stability even if all the above flight risks bolted. A core of GCU, UVU, and the 2 Alaska schools would become permanent member of the WAC that you could pair with a few outcast DI schools and a few DII upgrades for the next 100 years.

Now Alaska is the only state w/o a DI bball school in the US. I think they may be willing to eventually upgrade and I think the WAC should go ahead and start those conversation ASAP. But until then they really should try to secure another DII school just in case they lose a few in the next round of realignment.

_________________Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

WAC FLIGHT RISKSUCSB - is waiting on the Big West invite.UMKC and Chicago St - are waiting on anyone in the Midwest to invite them except the Summit (and they might rethink that if they decide the travel is too much in the WAC)UTRGV - is waiting on a Southland inviteNMSU - is waiting on a Sun Belt full invite (or Southland non fb in invite)Seattle - is waiting on a WCC invite

Right, and I think there may be more options for some of these guys, too, than what's listed above, as they are the ultimate destination. I look at NMSU, UTRGV, CSU, CSUB, and SU as the most likely to split in a few years. I think the MVC is going to lose someone else soon, be it Wichita State, Missouri State, or Illinois State, and the backfilling from wherever they get that replacement (or replacements), could definitely be from the WAC (UMKC), or it's from the Horizon, Summit, OVC, or Southland, and *those* are where the WAC probably feels it. CSUB and Seattle could come out of whatever eventually happens with the WCC and BYU, or Hawaii's ollies...while I doubt Seattle goes right into the WCC, there's still Big West, Big Sky, and maybe a Summit spot in need of filling.

WAC FLIGHT RISKSUCSB - is waiting on the Big West invite.UMKC and Chicago St - are waiting on anyone in the Midwest to invite them except the Summit (and they might rethink that if they decide the travel is too much in the WAC)UTRGV - is waiting on a Southland inviteNMSU - is waiting on a Sun Belt full invite (or Southland non fb in invite)Seattle - is waiting on a WCC invite

While some of these schools might eventually be flight risks....they aren't flight risks, right now because there is no where for these schools to go, currently.

And the only way to make UMKC, CSU, and UTRGV 'flight risks', right now...is to add schools in Alaska. There is no way the eastern schools in this conference would want to travel to Alaska. NJIT is much closer.

UTRGV to Seattle is 2370 miles.UTRGV to Fairbanks is 4251 miles.UTRGV to Newark is 1952 miles.Chicago to Seattle is 2063 miles.Chicago to Fairbanks is 3455 miles.Chicago to Newark is 780 miles.

Round trip to Fairbanks for UTRGV would be 8500 miles.

Adding Alaska schools to this conference would be disastrous for the travel budgets and student welfare.

Adding Alaska schools to this conference would be disastrous for the travel budgets and student welfare.

I don't disagree, but what's the viability of basketball independence these days? How's NJIT really doing?

If it came to Alaska or independence, I have to bet some go for the Alaska route. Filling a schedule from January on is just not going to happen for a lot of these schools. A conference, no matter how far flung it is, provides that, as well as AQ.

WAC FLIGHT RISKSUCSB - is waiting on the Big West invite.UMKC and Chicago St - are waiting on anyone in the Midwest to invite them except the Summit (and they might rethink that if they decide the travel is too much in the WAC)UTRGV - is waiting on a Southland inviteNMSU - is waiting on a Sun Belt full invite (or Southland non fb in invite)Seattle - is waiting on a WCC invite

While some of these schools might eventually be flight risks....they aren't flight risks, right now because there is no where for these schools to go, currently.

And the only way to make UMKC, CSU, and UTRGV 'flight risks', right now...is to add schools in Alaska. There is no way the eastern schools in this conference would want to travel to Alaska. NJIT is much closer.

UTRGV to Seattle is 2370 miles.UTRGV to Fairbanks is 4251 miles.UTRGV to Newark is 1952 miles.Chicago to Seattle is 2063 miles.Chicago to Fairbanks is 3455 miles.Chicago to Newark is 780 miles.

Round trip to Fairbanks for UTRGV would be 8500 miles.

Adding Alaska schools to this conference would be disastrous for the travel budgets and student welfare.

A: The conference would have to vote for it for Alaska schools to get invited.B: Even if somehow the WAC managed to shove this down the throat of the WAC schools, only UMKC/ChiSt likely have an "open" invitation to leave right now. CSUB and UTRGV aren't leaving a post season bid in all sports to be independent, and neither will NMSU unless this pushed their fb to FCS (which I doubt). And Seattle is not a travel issue (further to UTRGV than to Alaska)C: Distance doesn't really matter, they make the Alaska travel partners a long weekend trip so each school only travels there once a year in every sport. And quiet honestly at that level of sports the student athletes will benefit from telling stories about where/who they played. People are playing football games all over in places Ireland and bball tourneys in Hawaii while talking about playing games in Mexico and Asia for the experience of the student athlete. Having a kid playing at Chicago State being able to tell his grandkids about the time he went up to Alaska and had a double double will be something they can talk about for years and years...more so than going to Las Crueces, Edinburg, and Bakersfield.D: Travel budgets would go up only slightly it cost $400 commercial to fly to Seattle from most WAC schools, Alaska is $800, that also removes a few random trips to travel to schools on the East coast for games and having to pay DII schools (often more than the increase in their travel budget) to come in to play them.

Still I'm not sure the Alaska school will upgrade, but if they did the WAC is the best option. If Alaska thinks its beneficial then the WAC should do everything is can to make it happen.

_________________Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

Adding Alaska schools to this conference would be disastrous for the travel budgets and student welfare.

I don't disagree, but what's the viability of basketball independence these days? How's NJIT really doing?

If it came to Alaska or independence, I have to bet some go for the Alaska route. Filling a schedule from January on is just not going to happen for a lot of these schools. A conference, no matter how far flung it is, provides that, as well as AQ.

I agree.But, we are not at that point yet where Independence is upon us.There are still many options within the footprint...that have not been fully exhausted.

Why not focus on the heart of the conference for now? IF....and it's a big IF, the WAC can secure a school or two in Colorado...or a surrounding state. Then the whole situation has changed...and there wouldn't be a need to look to Alaska.

If the WAC does add some DII schools from the center of the conference...and they need a school to help with scheduling, then add NJIT for a short term run. Give them till the new schools get up to DI...then NJIT can find a new home.

There are just so many options...I can't believe Alaska is anywhere near the top of the list.Denver/Colorado needs to be at the top of the list.

I agree that most if not all of the WAC schools would leave if they had an invite, but invites don't come easily. Chicago State was basically asked to leave the Summit, MidCon at the time, and I seriously doubt that there is any way they would be invited back. UMKC's departure from the Summit was made with the statement from then that they wanted a conference where they would be more likely to be able to compete. Their departure was seen as a real questionable move at the time and I think there is at best a 50-50 chance that they would be readmitted it they ask to cone back. Seattle has been turned down by there hoped for destination of the West Coast Conference. The Summit league was quoted a few months ago as saying that they could go to 14 teams immediately if they wanted to but they were only interested in good fits. I am guessing that most of the teams that were wanting in were WAC schools. The Summit is becoming a much more highly respected league in the past couple of years. It's post season men's basketball tournament is one of the most highly attended of any of the mid majors and the attendance at the women's post season tournament is greater than some of the major conferences.

In my opinion, the WAC's only opportunities are with move up DII schools. (Schools must have an invite to a conference before they can move up.

Chicago State's a mess. They retained accreditation, and maybe that's the first step toward recovery; that school, were it to "bounce back," shouldn't have a problem finding a more stable home (or, more stable than the WAC). Partly, I feel that way because the Summit was close to a free fall itself not a few years after losing CSU. I look at the Dakota schools, the "Horizon-despised" IUPU's, the flip-flopping UMKC and Oral Roberts (who isn't in great financial shape, either)...I think the Summit will take CSU back, even if they don't want them back.

I think Summit looks good now...but I still question the sustainability. And that hurts the WAC.

Wherever the WAC core could be, I don't think the conference ever overcame the MWC split. Too many hurt feelings, too much CUSA...it was a conference nobody really wanted to be in, and remains to this day. Building up a new core, even if states like Colorado, Utah, Washington, and California could continually pump out programs to D1, the nature of the school systems will drive these schools to look to other options: like UC or CSU and the Big West and MWC, the mountain state schools and the Big Sky...private schools and the WCC...the heartland and western front of the midwest and the MVC...it's those guys: MWC, BSC, BWC, WCC, and MVC who should never have to lose sleep.

What really hurts the WAC, as currently situated, is that Grand Canyon and Utah Valley are the only ones who really want to be there. There just aren't any other DII schools out west that are in the position to move up. it will always be one school away from collapse. It also lacks a geographic center which makes it hard to set an identity for the league other than being a halfway house between DII and more stable leagues.

Wondering why Chi State, UMKC and possibly UTRGV....haven't just moved over to the A-Sun? At least, the A-Sun isn't on the brink of collapse.

There are a ton more schools to chose from in the eastern half of the US...rather than the meager amount of schools to move up in the western half. Especially, if the WAC tries to add schools in Alaska.

Wondering why Chi State, UMKC and possibly UTRGV....haven't just moved over to the A-Sun? At least, the A-Sun isn't on the brink of collapse.

There are a ton more schools to chose from in the eastern half of the US...rather than the meager amount of schools to move up in the western half. Especially, if the WAC tries to add schools in Alaska.

All of these schools are way outside of the Atlantic Sun footprint. I doubt that the A Sun would want them.

The A-Sun, like the WAC, is one departure from potentially collapsing. I'd also argue the the WAC had more brand equity, and one of the two schools closest to Chicago State in the A-Sun, Lipscomb, has little in common with them. Both Lipscomb and NKU are the most likely to land somewhere else. If Chicago State or UMKC leave now, it is self-fulfilling that the WAC will collapse.

The A-Sun, like the WAC, is one departure from potentially collapsing. I'd also argue the the WAC had more brand equity, and one of the two schools closest to Chicago State in the A-Sun, Lipscomb, has little in common with them. Both Lipscomb and NKU are the most likely to land somewhere else. If Chicago State or UMKC leave now, it is self-fulfilling that the WAC will collapse.

I disagree.FGCU, N. Fla, Stetson, Jville, SC Upstate....none of these schools are going anywhere...nor, do they need to go anywhere. So, already ...the A-Sun has five schools that won't go anywhere. If you add....Chi State, UMKC and UTRGV to that list...you get a conference that is much more stable then the WAC. Oh, and don't forget NJIT. So, now you can add four to the A-Sun. Does it seem more stable than the WAC, now?

As has been stated....there are only two schools in the WAC that wouldn't leave....UVU and GCU.

If the A-Sun did loose a school or two...at least there are decent markets and schools to choose from in the eastern half of the US which fit in the footprint. In the WAC area....there is no consensus picks to move up....and two of the alternatives are in Alaska(which I feel will force these three to flee the conference).

If the WAC folds....it will be because of the conferences own inability to create something that had a chance of lasting. The current group of schools adds nothing to stability. The current footprint is un-sustainable....if they don't put some schools in the CENTER of the conference. So, I see the WAC folding no matter what.....because they can't or won't fix their own issues.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum